Understanding INSAS

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Raj Malhotra »

thanx for the info

Re SBM, though i thought that DrawaT had israeli help.

Incidentaly I think admin should consider creating a folder for Arjun (or land warfare systems) in order to collect info on Arjun.

Some of the BRites have commented that regular INSAS is orange, Actually it continues to be brown, the pixs sometimes show incorrect hues due to flash/colour composition of reels

and all the kudos to shiv for the terrific work. it seems that kersi has also given the broucures/pix to kapil so we will some more of this stuff.
member_3999
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 2
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 05:32

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by member_3999 »

Hi Guys,
I have quite a lot of modern assault rifles are of the bullpup design.Like the Vector Cr-21 which is based the Israeli galil uses the bullpup design.My question is what are the advantages of this design over the conventional assault rifle.
member_3999
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 2
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 05:32

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by member_3999 »

Oops,
I meant I have noticed that quite a few of modern AR's are of bullpup design,
Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Raj Malhotra »

Originally posted by Ashish_Mishra:
Hi Guys,
I have quite a lot of modern assault rifles are of the bullpup design.Like the Vector Cr-21 which is based the Israeli galil uses the bullpup design.My question is what are the advantages of this design over the conventional assault rifle.
The advantage of shorter length.
Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Nandai »

Shorter length, but with a barrel just as long as on conventional rifles.
Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Vick »

Couple of other advantages are better aiming and the firing position of the holder is more compact leading to a smaller profile presented to the enemy.

There are major disadvantages though, the firing chamber is very close to face and head of the holder. Which makes it really loud and the hot and fast ejected casing flies very close to the face. Also, if used at night time, the muzzle flash is also closer than a conventional AR therefore reduces the visibility of the person firing it. Not to mention that the flash will leave temporary retinal spots which could reduce the soldier's effectiveness for short periods of time.
Riza Zaman
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 69
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: NYC, NY
Contact:

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Riza Zaman »

Doesn't the bullpup design also sacrifice on the accuracy of the weapon?
Sanjay
BRFite
Posts: 1224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Chaguanas, Trinidad

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Sanjay »

Raj, you may well be correct. However, I do recall reading that the French were consultants during the plans for the Polish T-72 upgrade. I think also we have to distinguish between the whole FCS and the Thermal Imager component. I again stress that you may well be correct.
Guest

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Guest »

http://www.iisc.ernet.in/insa/ch31.pdf

Lots of info and awesome pic of ARJUN
Sanjiv
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 20
Joined: 19 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Sanjiv »

RAJ,
excellent article on the insas.I would be grateful for some information if you have it.
Any info on the H&K G4 assult rifle with case less ammo , particularly in ref to the cost of the rifle , ammo and project status?
Any info on the AK -94 ABAKAN other than what is available at JANES?
One comment my sources say that disposable magazines make for lazy and untidy soldiers .
Excellent work regards.
Sanjiv
Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Nandai »

Sanjiv, the gun that H&K designed that used caseless ammo was called G11. The project was cancelled when the US withdrew from it.
Here are a few links with some info on the AN-94.

AN-94 Abakan

The AN-94s manufacturer

This is for you who like the really BIG guns.

Enjoy!!!
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by ks_sachin »

Originally posted by nitin:
Ks_Sachin,welcome back to BR..btw,whats your mail id?

REGARDS,
Nitin
kssachin@hotmail.com is my mail id. I have not been away but rather decided to keep a lower profile. just got board at some of the discussions that were happening i guess.
On the Arjun issue I had a long conversation with a Brig involved with the testing of the tank. He was dad's coursemate. Pretty interesting things he said and that made me realise that the whole issue of Arjun's usefulness to the IA is a lot more than armour, mobility and effectiveness.
cheers
sachin
Roop
BRFite
Posts: 670
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Roop »

Pretty interesting things he said and that made me realise that the whole issue of Arjun's usefulness to the IA is a lot more than armour, mobility and effectiveness.
Anything you care to share with us?
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by JCage »

Sachin,
Check mail id.Its giving a storage exceeded warning...!!Mail me at nitinvenkatesh@yahoo.com when you're thru. :)

Regards,
Nitin
Priyank
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 69
Joined: 22 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Priyank »

Cross post from the miscellaneous questions thread :-

-------------------------------------------------

From the same site:

INSAS carbine?

Is that the INSAS carbine? If so what are the two triggers for? I see no grenade launcher attached.

Are there any other pictures of the INSAS carbine available on the net? This is the first such picture that I have ever seen.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by srai »

Originally posted by Nandai:

This is for you who like the really BIG guns.

Enjoy!!!
Any ANTI-MATERIEL RIFLE in service with IA?
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by srai »

Originally posted by Raj Malhotra:
Incidentally I have not understood the logic of putting thermal site in the hole in the wall of front turret. This supposed to be heaviest armored region and this only makes it weaker. Why not on top of turret like almost everybody else?
Yes same thoughts!

There's no logic (other than probably being simpler to do it that way) putting a "big hole" right where the tank is supposed to take hits. :roll:

A close hit around that area will probably be good as a kill.

Although that is how the Leopard 2A1-A4 was designed by Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW)... and Arjun is based off that design with KMW as consultant. (originally nitin had revealed this finding)

Look at this Leopard 2A1 picture, so similar to Arjun:
<img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land ... pic1-s.jpg" alt="" />
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/leopard/
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by JCage »

The Armor modules behind the window extend further behind into the turret compared to other parts of the turret...so it isnt a weakened area.
bagha
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 32
Joined: 27 Jan 2001 12:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by bagha »

okay i got some feedback about the INSAS from a user.
its a sweet machine... very accurate... low recoil. But it tends to jam at times. A brand new Ichchapore weapon had a couple of rusted parts.
The jamming problem is as widespread as one in five rifles. However it takes less than 5 seconds to get rid of the problem. Just cock it again, no hassles.. so that shows the strength of the design aspect.
this guy i talked to was a Kalashnikov fan, but admitted that if you wanna hit something with some accuracy, there's nothing like the INSAS.
Hope i answered some questions.
Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Raj Malhotra »

Hi Priyank, this is the only pic of Insas carbine I have come across while surfing. It has been picked from an obscure GOI site http://www.defstand.gov.in/search/products/prod.htm , as usual located by eager BR beavers. Carbine supposedly has since undergone changes and mark 2 model may surface soon

Double trigger is to enable it to be fired both as a bullpup and a normal gun.

India purchased 100 pieces of South African anti material gun.

For German G-11/12 firing case less bullets, this site is good http://world.guns.ru/main-e.htm
Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Raj Malhotra »

Originally posted by bagha:
okay i got some feedback about the INSAS from a user.
its a sweet machine... very accurate... low recoil. But it tends to jam at times. A brand new Ichchapore weapon had a couple of rusted parts.
The jamming problem is as widespread as one in five rifles. However it takes less than 5 seconds to get rid of the problem. Just cock it again, no hassles.. so that shows the strength of the design aspect.
this guy i talked to was a Kalashnikov fan, but admitted that if you wanna hit something with some accuracy, there's nothing like the INSAS.
Hope i answered some questions.
Interesting

What is the reason for jamming? if you say that it is one in five weapons then it is manufacture specific and not design specific.

if it is inherent defect in the rifle then it would be said something like once every 50 bullets & so on?
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by srai »

Originally posted by Raj Malhotra:

Double trigger is to enable it to be fired both as a bullpup and a normal gun.

India purchased 100 pieces of South African anti material gun.
Thanks for the info on the anti-material gun.

Still unclear about the carbine's bullpup and the normal gun part though. I did read your description at the beginning but still not clear on
1. what advantages offered by each ... and why the neccessity of both? (close range and longer range???)
2. Any foreign rifles/carbine offering similar feature?
3. what is a carbine ... if I may ask (apology for not doing my own research here)?
Priyank
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 69
Joined: 22 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Priyank »

Raj,

Thanks a lot for that link. :)

Srai,

Here's a thread from BR's archives. Lots of nice info. It should answer some of your questions.

Thread from BR's archies
bagha
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 32
Joined: 27 Jan 2001 12:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by bagha »

i wouldnt say that there is a design problem. coz there arent that many insas rifles in the unit that the guy i talked to serves in. so maybe its just bad luck.
talking to him i got the feel that the feel good factor of a kalashnikov is just that.. a feel good factor. most people say that the reason they like the AK is because of the "dum" it packs. that perception ofcourse is because of the heavy recoil of the weapon. and the other reason for the popularity of the weapon is its ability to autofire, whether or not it is actually ever employed.
so i would say in a conventional war, the INSAS would rule. High accuracy, lightweight ammo, long range, and easy to get out jammed rounds... i would say that should be a infantryman's dream.
now if only it would look a bit less complicated and a bit more mean.
Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Rudra »

using the same size of bullet are there any options to increase the damage with a new design?

how about a micro-apds tungsten design ? police
forces already use this plastic encased dart
concept (fletchette)..some even shoot multiple
small darts.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by JCage »

Hey Rudra,
Lest i forget...something you'll really like. :)

The poles say 72 million 4 for 250 FCS kits.Needs no extensive mods to the T72.Should incorporate an El-op TI set.Been in service with the Poles on their PT-91's for some time now..hence tried and tested.

The DRAWA-T.(via a friendly Pole Pauly)

http://www.pcosa.com.pl/TI_FCS_DRAWA-T.htm

In german.

http://www.kotsch88.de/t-72m-2.htm

Sims for the same.(scroll down)

http://www.kolt.com.pl/kolt/czantan2.htm

Regards,
Nitin
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by shiv »

Originally posted by Rudra Singha:
using the same size of bullet are there any options to increase the damage with a new design?

Hey Rudra - increase damage to what? Tissue damage in humans is pretty severe in any hi velocity injury. You may have seen slowed down x-ray videos of anesthetized sheep thigh being shot.

Thrrp, and its through, after which the hole inside the thigh expands - ripping muscles nerves and vessels - sucks in dirt and as the hole collapses - squellllch - the blood spurts out. Yeccch.

Through the head? Great. Bzt. It's through and after the guy crumples - a little fountain of blood.
Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Rudra »

well then what are the pro-AK47 types complaining
about ? "dum" could be a nebulous thing to pin
down.

maybe they need to increase the recoil with less
gas ejection and a louder sound.

Nitin, thanks.
Joeqp
BRFite
Posts: 111
Joined: 11 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: Earth

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Joeqp »

Originally posted by Rudra Singha:
maybe they need to increase the recoil with less
gas ejection and a louder sound.

Nitin, thanks.


Even better: give the "AK lovers" a .303 for a few days. They'll never touch anything with any recoil after that... :D
rajkumar
BRFite
Posts: 423
Joined: 22 Sep 2000 11:31
Location: London U.K
Contact:

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by rajkumar »

The 5.56mm round is inherently unstable in flight and it "tumbles" once it enters organic matter. This tumbling action produces a LOT of tissue damage.

In a lot of respect the 5.56mm size bullet is better than the 7.62mm bullet because the 7.62mm bullet because of its momentum had a tendency to "pass" through i.e not be stopped by organic matter. This pass through produces "clean" wounds wereas 5.56mm wounds are very messy with bits of metal and body tissue/bones etc. clogging up the wound.

In a war situation it is probably worth wounding a enemy solider than killing him out right because a wounded person ties up a lot of logistics resources of the enemy. Wounded soilders also have a very bad moral effect on other enemy soilders. Listening to a wounded man is very bad for nerves.

We also have to bear in mind that current international law as applicable to war bans the use of "dum dum" bullets because of the horendous nature of the wounds they produce. International law also bans the use "shotguns" and "fletchette" based ammo for similar reasons.

However dum dum bullets need to be issued to Police because in a law & order situations you would want the bullet to only enter the person you fired at and not pass through and hit a by-stander. One of the reason that in India we have so many by-standers being killed is that the .303 bullet is a very powerful bullet which goes through a number of bodies when its fired.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by JCage »

That wounded vs dead is a moot point.Some complain that while theoretically all these calculations are fine..its better to have an ipso facto dead opponent than one who can still spray bullets towards you.One also occasionally gets the feeling that once the US "chose" the 5.56mm path,everyone jumped on to the bandwagon.
Regarding .303 vs SLR...you really appreciate accounts of rapid fire WW2 types with .303 after you fire the darn thing.Buggers must have had shoulders of steel.

Regards,
Nitin
Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Rudra »

wounding could be useful in a longer war. in shorter affairs its best to do more permanent damage.

interestingly german deer hunters of old had
problems with regular bullets when firing in
hilly terrain where it was difficult to judge
distance and set sights for that. they came up
with a bullet (loffelspitz?) that had a part of
the nose cose scooped out. that was supposed to
maintain a flat apds-ish trajectory making the
settings superflous. wonder if its still being
used by hunters or more powerful charges have
flattened the curve anyway?
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/nato3/nato3_manual/ammo.htm

fletchette rounds - I have seen photos of British
police using revolver rounds of this type. but
dont know if they entered wide service.

Do US or indic tanks field AP shells - ones that
are packed with steel darts ?

5.56mm could have started from paras wherein
it was important for each man to carry more ammo.
Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Raj Malhotra »

Another interesting trend in the small arms is the movement away from obsessive standardization over 5.56mm weapons.

As most of us are aware, the trend in eighties was to develop everything around one family of guns & around one round and an example is off course is the INSAS family. Now we keep hearing criticism of INSAS which tends to confuse us, without realizing that to a certain extent this is a world wide trend wherein the designers have given up trying to search for the El Dorado of weapons i.e. one weapon & one round which can play all roles. The 5.56mm round remains the standard round but other calibers have been accepted to be equally relevant in many situations.

This requirement of different calibers is being accepted. But the Indian military establishment has never been renowned for its capacity to spot simple commonsense trends (brochure mentality?). The apocryphal story is off course some reluctance in the brass to adopt the SLR in place of bolt action, as it did not lend itself to beautiful handling in the parade ground.

In the INSAS saga, the effort initially was to develop an over powerful round with more powerful propellant and heavier bullet then NATO SS109. Due to the failure of DRDO this was thankfully given up and the INSAS family is in production, but no attempt is being made to keep up the development in the other calibers.

The various calibers and weapons are also relevant in continuing exchange of fire across the border, light skirmishes at the border, special operations and COIN (or more appropriately COT/COPW/COCW)

Indian forces in any case are using almost all the calibers discussed below. In addition the sniper rifles and suppressed weapons even of the same caliber preferably use special ammo/weapons for better results.

Let me make a list of relevant calibers/bores (as per my choice ;) ): -

1. 9mm x 19

This is off course the caliber in which pistols and sub machine guns are produced. OFB produces a good pistol FN-35 in this caliber.

The submachine gun is the ubiquitous Sterling gun (or wrongly called sten gun) that is very old model. Though it was adequate for sometime but now a more modern gun is needed like Uzi or MP-5. I say- Uzi. Because it is cheap and used in around 70 nations. MP-5 is very costly.

This caliber is used in mainly police actions, personal security, and urban gunfights. The reason is the big bullet with slow speed tends to drop the target while limiting collateral damage. For instance the collateral damage can be through bullets traveling through the door & killing off somebody, bullets killing of bystanders 600 m away unintentionally or the bullets killing a person behind the target and so on. The weapons of 9mm are also small and easily wielded around in confined spaces. Normally used in ranges upto 50m-100m.

No development of new submachine gun in this caliber is known to be in progress in India.

(A newer trend of PDW for instance H&K 4.6mm x 30 and FN 5.8mm x 28 is also evolving but it is not yet fully caught on. On the issue of small arms one can easily trail behind to learn from the experience of others)

2. 7.62mm x 39mm

Now this is the caliber for the famous Kalashnikov. This caliber has found wide acceptance as military level carbine. The bullet is adequately heavy and the gun can be used for around 100m-200m.

The reason is that all this wounding business is good for explaining the inadequacies of 5.56mm but the fact remains that the soldiers prefer this heavy/big caliber alongwith legendary reliability of Kalashnikov.

India has around 200-300,000 weapons of this caliber. Lot of nations use this caliber for special forces even though their standard caliber is 5.56mm. Some western nations donot use it due to more political reasons then military but the same constraints do not bind us.

I think what is required in acknowledgment of the military relevance of this round and giving up needless competition with INSAS. The better course would be to adapt and develop an variant of the INSAS to fire this caliber also.

It can replace the sterling from “military” use especially COIN.

India has incidentally started manufacturing ammo of this caliber.

Now the other thing I wanted to mention is the equipping policy of the military. It would be prudent to maintain a large number of guns extra for different situations at (say) Battalion level. Like Kalashnikov for COIN, LMG for troops moving in enemy areas, extra sniper/marksmanship rifles for imposing attrition/seize situation and GPMGs/HMGs for holding positions etc.

Before raising the issue of training, remember we are volunteer army with very long service years and we can adequately train men. While on the issue of cost - the small arms are still very cheap (relatively).

Obsessive standardization around one round and even around one standard mix is incorrect.

The present situation & actually the ground reality seems to be that different weapons are issued on demand but in an ad hoc manner which creates confusion in the mind of DDM (leading to criticism of INSAS) and also more importantly is ad hoc and not well thought out policy. For instance, the use of AKM in COIN, INSAS in conventional military situations and handing over of heavy machine guns in forward areas (under fire to relieving units/re-enforcing units to bolster their fire power).

3. 5.56mm x 45

I have said a lot on this though I want to add that this family should be developed further by for instance adding a sniper rifle in this caliber. The LMG is dieing to be upgraded to a sniper/marksmanship weapon. It has a heavy barrel and all that is needed is the special care in selecting/machinning the barrels and special (accurate ammo) bullets.

Such a gun would be relevant till say 300-500m. Try aiming at something the size of a head (football equivalent) at 200 m and you will know that the iron sights are inadequate. Scopes are a necessity to see the target.

The objection off course is that the gun is difficult to use at short range if a scope is added. To tackle this situation, emergency iron sights or Reflex sights can be mounted on top of scopes for short-range use. Or the scopes can be mounted towards a side so that the iron sights remain useful.

A belt fed LMG should also be considered for areas where something heavier is needed (then normal INSAS LMG) but the weight is still an issue like for Paras and in Siachin.

An important indigenous attachment missing from the INSAS family is the grenade launcher attached to the rifle. The muzzle launched grenade is a different thing (heavier – shorter ranged) then the single round grenade firing weapon attached beneath the barrel (forgot the exact term) The design that seems to be adopted is the Soviet/Russian and some Bulgarian rifles equipped with such a grenade launcher were imported.

There is no known policy to develop any of the three things mentioned under this caliber.

4. 7.62mm x 51 NATO

This caliber was the standard round till recently. Interesting enough this round will continue to remain relevant. Some armies (e.g. Australia) that phased out this caliber GPMG and replaced it with 5.56mm LMG had to induct it back. The more powerful bullet gives a better range and penetration at longer ranges. (Around ~ 800m compared to ~ 400m of 5.56mm)

Most of the western armies that have shifted to 5.56mm continue to use 7.62mm GPMGs. It seems (hopefully) Indian forces will also use this caliber GPMG.

For people interested in trivia, the US army adopted two weapons in late eighties (discarding their local designs) that were being used by Indian forces for decades. Those being Gmag GPMG and Carl Gastaf (both manufactured by India)

Though one of the limitations of this Gmag GPMG is lack of single shot and short 2-3 round burst fire capacity. I wonder whether DRDO is interested in addressing these (non high profile) concerns.

Now the thing I find odd is non-conversion of Isapore rifle (the standard 7.62mm rifle) for marksmanship role. This rifle is very very very well made and considered the best rifle in the western portfolio. By adding an accurate barrel (using INSAS machinery- I am assuming it is flexible) and special ammo it can b converted to replace Dragnovs. Can be used for say 300-600m use. Issue can be one per section. Dragnov 7.62mm x 54R which are currently being used, are very poor sniper rifle and in fact are not even called sniper rifle but a marksmanship weapon. Their only relevance was in Soviet type doctrine to supplement the normal conscript troops who were armed with short ranged inaccurate Kalashnikov.

No activity of DRDO or OFB is known in any these directions.

Just to add trivia, the US sniper rifle M21 action IIRC is inherited from their WW I rifle. It is not the best but is very adequate. Though their rifles are definitely sniper quality.

I think there is requirement of strong dose of immediate realization that adequate, simple and innovative solutions are the best. Refer the erstwhile Soviet Union. In the present slow attrition policy and special operations, every small advantage has to be pressed. Even Israeli Galil sniper is considered terribly inaccurate but is still adequate for most of the tasks assigned.

5. .338 inch Lapua Magnum (X ?67)

This caliber is emerging as a suitable rifle for a high quality “long range” “sniper use” use say 600m-1200m in preferably bolt action. Note - if marksmanship capable rifles are used by normal infantry as discussed above then the sniper rifle becomes limited for special purpose sniper teams. This is the only caliber in this note which I think has not found introduction in the (regular) army (for the special forces nobody can really tell)

Now just for info the bolt action is practically deemed to be perfected since Mauser action in WW I. It is a simple reliable action and does not need long production line or complicated designing.

One does not need to manufacture the best rifle under the sun. It is enough to be adequate.

Another off repeated argument is that no indigenous manufacturing is done, as adequate numbers are not needed by the army. This is biggest nonsense – tripe if I ever heard one. Countries with smaller requirement then India have set up manufacturing base for high quality small arms/sniper as these weapons are usually handmade on specific orders.

6. 12.7mm x 107 (Soviet caliber)

India manufactures Heavy Machine Guns of this caliber that is used in tanks, helos and ships. To my knowledge these guns have not been applied for infantry use except for a small batch imported -? Browning. The nations that use this caliber HMG are for instance US, Russia, Pakistan, China, Argentina etc.

A benefit of this weapon is long-range area suppression weapon ~2000m. It seems that army wants to use 30mm AGL (automatic grenade launcher which will be manufactured under license for this role.

The benefit of AGL is that the explosive content of the heavier round and the curving trajectory can be used to destroy sangars and also fire at targets behind the cover. The disadvantage is that it cannot be used for anti aircraft use and spread is greater. This anti aircraft use will become more important due to proliferation of UAVs and use of Helos & props.

Manpads are very costly, single use, high maintenance items. Also they are not issued widely for border deployment in peacetime. The life cycle cost of manpad against a HMG can be ten times higher.

This is not to say, the current doctrine is correct but rather the point is that 12.7mm x 107 continues to be relevant and its use in infantry deployment has to be seriously reconsidered.

Now this caliber is also relevant to anti material rifle use. For anti material rifle use also two types of rifles can be selected/are relevant. One “light” “SLR” for special purpose use, say, 12.7mm NSV HMG manufactured by India converted to such use with better barrel and special ammo. This type of rifle will be light, cheap and can be used extensively in anti material role over long range ~1500m.

As would be obvious no plans by DRDO and OFB in this direction.

7. India has imported a bolt action anti material rifle from South Africa (~100) that can fire 14.5mm, 20mm (and 12.7 mm for training) rounds. 14.5mm is used for longer range (~2500mm?) and 20mm for heavier punch (~1500m). Though on the heavier side, this is one of the best rifles of its type. It is accurate and has low recoil. Indigenous manufacture is definitely warranted in role of heavier anti material rifle.

As would be obvious no plans by DRDO and OFB in this direction.

It should be mentioned at this stage that anti material rifle though have good range but are not really meant for sniper use. 7.62mm and .338 rifles achieve the best accuracy. These rifles are meant for use against larger targets like vehicles and targets like radars etc. Their accuracy may be almost 2-4 times less in MOA compared to genuine sniper rifles.

8. Another category is off course, suppressed varieties of the aforesaid rifles. Normally for suppressed rifles special/different barrels and special (slower & heavier) ammo is warranted.

9. For the sake of context it should be mentioned that OFB intends to manufacture 30mm AGL and hand held 40mm grenade launcher (? 6G-30)

10. India as we off course know, manufactures 84mm Carl Gastaf that is a very good weapon. Its performance can be enhanced by use of tripod, FCS, laser range finder etc. It would be useful to develop a lighter disposable version like AT4.

Now in this context, an important deficiency that was felt during the Kargil was the lack of a heavy RPG. The Milan 2 system is very costly (~US$ 10,000) a round. The imported RPGs were something like US$ 1500-3500 a round.

A simple method would be to adapt Milan-2 rocket by removing the guidance system & actuators for the movement of fins i.e. using the warhead and the two stage rocket motor to make an RPG. It would be cheap, indigenous and available in short time with a ready manufacturing base. It is big caliber (?) 135mm round and carries a very heavy punch (2-3) times compared with Carl Gastaf. The flame launcher can be adapted for non-disposable launcher tube and a disposable launcher tube can be developed for the lighter variant. It would be a formidable tank killer and bunker buster. Somewhat similar surgery can be done on konkur also which is also manufactured by India.

The latest offering of Bofors for US/UK unguided RPG competition is also based on adaption of their Bill-2.

As would be obvious no plans by DRDO and OFB in this direction.

11. Some of the areas that is being addressed for the infantry is off course: -

Bulletproof jackets – after a long delay

Better radios – when?

Thermal imagers – why no order is being given to BEL that has set up license manufacture with ELOP?

These aforesaid issues seem to be same as the flare dispensers, everybody knew their importance but the delay was perpetual till the M-17 was downed in Kargil. I hope somebody could call up Musarraff and tell him to hold off troubling us till MoD – brass – OFB – DRDO can think up the proper equipping policy.

12. I admit most of this post is taking the colour of one of earlier posts on this issue but over last 6 months I had time to do some polishing (grin) and it is from a different context.

13. Most of the things I have mentioned are very short gestation projects and whose requirement is immediate.

14. Slightly out of context but some other weapons on which indigenous base have to be created are Manpad, vshord and “Light” anti aircraft. Manpad can be license manufacture of Igla, vshord can be Igla with a booster and “light” anti aircraft gun can be adaptation of Medak 30mm gun or preferably 14.5mm single barrel gun with electric traverse.

15. I have written this portion to show that INSAS is a good rifle but it is not enough to rest upon the laurels and there are a lot of things to be done. High profile technologically complex projects are perhaps necessary but simultaneously there are some specific needs to be met for a continuing conflict.

16. Caveat- this is my interpretation of the situation from open sources or lack thereof. It off course possible that there is dedicated policy of DRDO-OFB-Army of which I am unaware. (Though I am skeptical that this is a position)
Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Raj Malhotra »

Most of the times being adequate in a timely manner is better being the best but late.
member_2708
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 1
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 05:32

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by member_2708 »

Anyone heard of the SA90, new infantry weapon developedby qinetiq or one of the other of shoots of DERA, this is the Holy grail of explosive based projectile weapons. from adaptable warheads to range and "lethality" adjusters on the gun.. its like the JSF of infantry weapons... wonder if it get jammed coz of mud or sand (that would be funny) any hue, why are we not working on things like this...or are we? MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Nandai »

Raj,just nitpicking ;) ,I think you got the calibres for heavy machine guns wrong. The standard Soviet/Russian heavy machine gun calibre is 12.7x109, not 12.7x107, and the american browning M2 uses 12.7x99.
The P90 uses 5.7x28 ammo.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by JCage »

The MP5 sure does rock-accuracy,punch ,everything.The NSG loves it.And they look good with it too.Good reason for selection no doubt. :D

I dont think it needs any special modification per se.Gun is powerful and accurate enough as it is.As per the Army motto of "Ek Goli Ek Dushman".

They do use it with mission specific scopes.

Dragunov,like all Ex-Sov stuff is comparatively cheap.Hence,the numbers purchased.But i definitely agree it wont win any awards for being accurate..as compared to its rivals.

The thing is that DRDO/OFB(particularly_the_OFB :roll: )and even the Army dont experiment & interact as much as they should.There are the usual reasons of sloth,govt inefficiency,too much workload/projects as it is,why bother and indian psyche.All true in their own way.

Thats why products like the Tank-ex etc,at least give hope that the future may be different.More innovation or at least sparks of the same.

regards,
Nitin
member_4035
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 1
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 05:32

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by member_4035 »

I remember seeing the ?French, ? British gun on BBC. The butt was literally a warehouse of stuff for the soldiers. Everything from the bayonet to knives/machetes, wire clippers, and pliers, amd much, much more. Looked really cool. :cool:
Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Raj Malhotra »

Originally posted by Nandai:
Raj,just nitpicking ;) ,I think you got the calibres for heavy machine guns wrong. The standard Soviet/Russian heavy machine gun calibre is 12.7x109, not 12.7x107, and the american browning M2 uses 12.7x99.
The P90 uses 5.7x28 ammo.
Nandai you are right on Russian caliber, typo.

As far as browning is concerned, I know the round is different, but I believe 500 of these HMGs were purchsed (Source SBM)
Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding INSAS

Post by Johann »

UK special forces needed something light and portable which packed punch, especially given the increasing availability of body armour. Peace Keeping/intervention forces also needed something to supress snipers and gunmen behind cover and at long range *without* using mortars, tanks or artillery which would cause unacceptable collateral casualities.

After extensive testing in Alaska, Brunei and Kuwait the preferred solution that emerged was a new version of the Army's standard 7.62 sniper rifle rechambered for .338 Lapua. Its far more portable than the .50 anti-material rifles, but it can still cut through an engine block (typical cover) at 1.2 km like a hot knofe through butter and put down a man in kevlar. Stopping a fleeing vehicle without killing the occupant also becomes considerably easier.

The new L115A1 will be routinely issued only to the special forces, and lead elements of 3 Commando Brigade and 16 Air Assault Brigade. However infantry units on hazardous peace keeping missions will also receive it for the duration of their tours. First reactions from the field have been very positive.
Locked